So is Bernie Sanders the future of the Democratic party? Could be.

Fresh from his win in New Hampshire, it's now clear that whether or not Bernie Sanders wins the Democratic nomination outright, he's already won in another, perhaps more important way: His brand of politics is the future of the Democratic Party.

Sanders is the overwhelming choice of young voters, scoring a staggering 84 percent of voters under 30 in the Iowa caucuses and projected to do better in New Hampshire.

Any young and ambitious Democrat looking at the demographics of the party and the demographics of Sanders supporters has to conclude that his brand of politics is extremely promising for the future. There are racial and demographic gaps between Clinton and Sanders supporters, but the overwhelming reality is that for all groups, the young people are feeling the Bern.

Whether the first Sanders-style nominee is Sanders himself or Elizabeth Warren or someone like a Tammy Baldwin or a Keith Ellison doesn't matter. What's clear is that there's robust demand among Democrats — especially the next generation of Democrats — to remake the party along more ideological, more social democratic lines, and party leaders are going to have to answer that demand or get steamrolled.

Well I have to say that I am certainly on board for a more Left leaning Democratic party.

However I am also a pragmatist, and I know that the most important thing to do is win elections.

If we are to move the party, and by extension the country, to the Left, we are going to have to do it incrementally and not expect one big election to get us there overnight.

And let's not forget that while the youth of America is pushing the Democratic party to the Left, that the base of the Republican party is pushing it toward the Right.

Sure most of that base is either sucking oxygen out of tanks while watching Fox News on the TV, or clogging their arteries with pork rinds and washing them down with cheap beer while listening to Right Wing talk radio, but they are still going to cling to life for a few more election cycles, so Democrats are going to have to play the long game.

Besides revolutions are notoriously bad for economies and government stability, so while that might play well with young anarchists, the older middle of the road voter is going to wake up in a cold sweat at the very thought of it.

So here's my thought.

We all join forces to help get Hillary elected in 2016, she chooses Elizabeth Warren as her VP, and in 2020 Hills takes a pass and throws her support behind Warren.

For some reason I have the unshakable feeling that Hillary simply cannot win two terms. So in my opinion this is the best case scenario.

I agree 100%! Alberta, the Texas of Canada, had their own revolution just last year: https://newrepublic.com/article/121730/how-socialist-party-just-took-over-texas-canada

"On Tuesday night, the near-unthinkable happened here in Canada when the New Democratic Party (NDP) stormed to a commanding majority in Alberta's provincial elections. To explain this in American terms: Imagine that Texas just overwhelmingly elected a legislature dominated by a left-wing party that opposes major oil pipeline projects; promises a core review of the obligations that oil and gas companies have to their communities; and favors fundamentally rethinking the tax structure toward large-scale redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Oh, and it's going to insist that climate change is real, man-made, and should bear on any policy that involves burning more hydrocarbons.

"Even this comparison is tough, because Americans don't support a mainstream party as unabashedly left-wing as the NDP. (The Greens would be a decent analog. Or a breakaway party of Bernie Sanders acolytes.) Publicly NDP members say they're “social democrats,” but most of its members, like Canadians at large, use that term interchangeably with “socialist.” Alberta has traditionally been unyielding soil for the NDP. The province is defined by its vast fossil fuel reserves, comparable to Saudi Arabia in its oil underfoot. Once oil was discovered there in the 1940s, actual Texans rushed up to establish companies and, concomitantly, a pro-capital, pro-religion, pro-firearm style of politics that the rest of Canada regards as distinctly American. For 44 years before Tuesday night, a span of twelve straight elections, Alberta has been run by the Conservative Party, a decent analogue to the Republican Party. Before that was nearly 40 years of even more conservative rule under the Social Credit Party."

In six years as a member of the Wal-Mart board of directors, between 1986 and 1992, Hillary Clinton remained silent as the world's largest retailer waged a major campaign against labor unions seeking to represent store workers.

Clinton has been endorsed for president by more than a dozen unions, according to her campaign Web site, which omits any reference to her role at Wal-Mart in its detailed biography of her.

Ha! What wishful thinking! Look, we know all of you are scared, but to reassure yourselves by saying that Bernie's supporters are Republicans-in-disguise... I mean, really!! But hey, if that will help you sleep at night, by all means, believe it. I assure you, Bernie's support, especially amongst young voters, is very real. That is, we are all very real Democrats. Deal with it. Your precious Hillary can't buy our support, so you have to pretend that we're Republicans in disguise!! LOLOL Freaking pathetic.

I seriously see Karl Rove lurking in the shadows behind Bernie's 'popularity.' Rove notoriously hates Hillary and will do everything in his power (and he still wields a lot of it and clout) to keep Hillary outbid the White House. Plus, Rove is still a Bush loyalist, and assumes that Hillary would beat Jeb by a wide margin. But Sanders beat Jeb? Not likely. Therefore, Rove's hand is all over this feel the Bern crap...

7:50 I have watched Senator Sanders for SEVERAL months. He is "right on" on his issues. I FREAKED OUT when he decided to run. I hoped he had HRC's back and would present the issues and solutions, but now my worst nightmare IS HAPPENING. Read this>http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/democratic-debate-clinton-sanders-213623

Nooooo!! As much as I can't stand Hillary, and as much as I love Bernie, I will be out voting Democrat in November. Again: better an odious Democrat than an odious Republican. And our most odious Democrats look like heaven-sent cherubs next to the likes of Trump, Cruz, and, more pertinent to Gryphen's blog, Palin. I am not ashamed to say that I do vote on party lines, though many would say one should vote on the person, not the party. But you will NEVER catch me voting for a Republican, and if I have to vote for Hillary in order to do my part to help put a Democrat in office, then so be it. And I would say 99% of the people I know who are Sanders supporters (and believe me, being a graduate student at a major university, I know A LOT of Bernie Sanders supporters) agree that it has never been more imperative to get a Democrat in office than it is this year, and they'll vote for Hillary if it means one of ours gets in. Because Heaven forbid it's one of theirs.

I love Elizabeth Warren but I think it is too soon to have two women on the Democratic ticket. (I'm female). We need Elizabeth in the Senate where she can really get things done to support progressive ideas. HUD Secretary Julian Castro would be a good choice for VP; other possibilities include Martin O'Malley and Sherrod Brown.

He also wrote in 1969 that breast cancer is the result of sexual repression and that if young women want to avoid cancer they should give in to the advances of their boyfriends. As a progressive young man, he was very interested in getting girls to throw off their sexual repression and give it up to progressive young men.

No kidding.

"…What do you think it really means when 3 doctors, after intense study, write that 'of the 26 patients (under 51) that developed breast cancer, one was sexually adjusted.' It means, very bluntly, that the way you bring up your daughter with regards to sexual attitudes may very well determine whether or not she will get breast cancer, among other things…How much guilt, nervousness have you imbued in your daughter with regard to sex? If she is 16, 3 years beyond puberty, the age at which nature set forth for child bearing, and spent a night out with her boyfriend, what is your reaction? Do you take her to a psychologist because she is 'maladjusted,' or a 'prostitute,' or are you happy she has found someone with whom she can share love? Are you concerned about HER happiness, or about your 'reputation' in the community?"

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2157403-sanders-cancer.html

[I happen to agree we shouldn't be teaching our daughters to be afraid of sex, but Sanders really goes overboard and here and in some other writings, he kind of makes it all about giving in to the boyfriend's advances]

The trick will be to get all those under 30 voters to actually vote. And register to vote if they're not registered.

I'm female and over 60 and I will vote for Bernie. Not only is Bernie popular among the youth, but there are Republicans and Independents that like what he stands for too. He can draw votes that Hillary can't.

There is also the danger that if Bernie isn't on the ticket, his supporters will not vote for Hillary. And vice versa. That will divide the Democratic Party and give us the same problem we have in non-presidential elections: Democratic voters staying home and then Republicans winning.

58 year old woman for Bernie! I will vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination though. Nothing is going to change if we don't get money out of politics and it's my #1 issue. We need to get started now.

If Clinton wins the nomination, it seems unlikely to me she would nominate Warren as her running mate. Or that Warren would be interested. Warren's vote is needed in the Senate. I see Hillary picking somebody awful.

I am not a Republican. I've been voting for Democrats since 1972, and I'm a registered Democrat. And I see Hillary Clinton picking somebody awful, because that's the crowd she runs in. You know, like her soul brothers, the Bushes. She won't pick a woman, especially one who is a vocal, unabashed progressive -- the anathema of Wall Street, Hilary's natural constituency -- as her VP. She won't pick a Castro brother either. She will pick somebody awful, along the lines of Jim Webb. Somebody with a "D" after his name, but a "D" in name only.

9:01 I hope she does not pick a woman. I'm a woman, and it's enough that she get into the Oval Oofice as President. She has to go younger for VP. You're afraid she'll go Blue Dog for VP. I don't think so. She gains nothing with that. Nope, she'll try to expand the electorate and the historic nature of her candidacy with a Latino or male African-American VP.

Why would Sanders not run for re-election in the Senate? That's ridiculous. It's the presidency or nothing?

Texas turning blue is HUGE because it represents the political participation of all those Latino voters you don't give a damn about, the ones that make up a huge voting block not just in Texas but in many other states.

That's very interesting, but Warren may not want the bullshit. I do love Bernie but his ideas will never fly if they keep a Republican Congress. My vote will always be with Hillary because of world events. She is the obvious choice, along with Bill to deal with the world leaders and the military...I can't imagine Bernie doing that. Let the VP deal with domestic problems while the Pres keeps us safe. We all know the real problem in this country is lazy voters, uninformed & stupid. Bernie is getting the young voters out which is good, but his wish list is just that...after 30 years in Congress what exactly has he done? He has been consistent in his outrage, I give him that..but Obama has tried all of the things he wants and with this congress, forget it. I love the fact Hillary made the point of so much of this stuff he wants falls to the states, not federal...so good luck with the red states. Sorry Bern..if you watched any of the Benghazi hearings you would see Hillary has nerves of steel and incredible knowledge of government.

Regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, we need Warren to remain in the Senate until she's ready to run for President (and the same goes for Bernie if Hil is the nominee). Without strong Democratic leadership in the Senate no Democratic president will get anything done.

I agree completely. I don't know if Warren will ever want to be President. She may want to make her mark in Congress. If Democrats don't continue to fuck up midterm elections, I see her as Majority Leader for many, many years to come.

Bernie would be a horrible POTUS! Hopefully, you watched the last debate between the two of them. He was not enjoyable to view, and she's faster on the uptick, a better debater and negotiator (already proven!) more experienced in foreign policy, knows heads of state throughout our world already, and would be ready to go the minute she takes the oath as POTUS.

WTF are you babbling on about 11:00am. Seems like you are just tossing around a buch of bullshit that only you believe. Hillary is just plain awful. Speak for yourself with all your false Hillary accolades. She is a terrible person and would be a terrible president.

To me it's simple:Hillary can win in November (probably)Bernie cannot win in November (probably)

Never underestimate the power of 500 million dollars in TV ads screaming "SOCIALIST" at the Independent voter non-stop for several months. (In fact it's already started.)

I pointed this out to a young woman, a 'true believer', and she said: Anyone who would be swayed by that is already voting Republican. I replied: If you actually believe that then the Democratic Party has a huge problem.

Exactly. This is the problem. Just think about how the republicans went after Obama for being a socialist (and all the people in the country they riled up). Obama never claimed to be a Socialist like Sanders does.

I don't see Hillary picking Bernie as her VP. Keeping my fingers crossed it will be Elizabeth Warren and that Elizabeth agrees! What a team they'd make. Wouldn't even compare to a Hillary/Bernie ticket!

3. I doubt Hillary would choose Warren. Warren doesn't get her anything, whereas there are a list of MEN that can "do" for her. Castro for Texas, latinos and the youth. Some guy in, I think, Colorado who speaks fluent Spanish and is fairly young. Senator I think.

Personally, I think Hillary is foolish not to choose Bernie as she can solidify the Democratic base by uniting the two camps.

I think Elizabeth Warren is great...but I would like to see Hillary win the nomination, embrace some of Bernie's "Revolution" ideas : (as a matter of fact when we elected our beloved Barack Obama, my premise was we needed and might get a Renaissance...not revolution) and select one of the Castro brothers as V.P. They could be the Revolution! Hispanic descent, passionate, very well educated, well spoken (we might even get the Renaissance I hoped for)! I agree with Bernie Sanders that we need a revolution, but they come at a cost. However we are already paying a cost: that of hearing the right wing faction in our country denigrating women, education, race, the poor...etc. I am so tired of it. I am 65 years old, I thought we had finished fighting some of these battles😕. Go Bernie! Go Hillary!

I think we'll hear more from President Obama as to this election cycle once the person has been nominated at the Democratic Convention.

Hillary will not throw him under the bus, but the Republican candidate will.

And, I'd rather have Hillary Clinton going up against the Republican candidate than Bernie Sanders. Hillary is much stronger and experienced in politics and could run circles around a Republican candidate than could Bernie. Al Bernie does is talk about a 'revolution' and it's getting old!

Democrats will lose if Bernie is the candidate. But, will win with Hillary Clinton as the nominee.

9:12 Sadder even more is that Senator Sanders first response was "Hillary that was below the belt". That was used against her with a sexual reference. Yesterday most of us supported Hillary on this very subject. "lame duck" or gloom and dome disrespect shaming of President Obama's unfinished agenda and accomplishments. Has anyone called him out on that remark?

1:39 His quote was "“Madam Secretary, that is a low blow,” But yes i think it was a sexist put down when it could have been directed at very specific issues regarding what the Presidents record showed.

One primary from a small state indicates very little. All that matters in primaries are delegates. That's it - the one with the most, gets the nom. Bernie cannot win more delegates than Hillary even after NH. He literally can't - unless the super delegates completely flip their endorsements, and they won't.In other words, it is nearly impossible for Bernie Sanders to get the most delegates for the Dem nomination.

The best case scenario: Sanders recognizes this fact early enough to campaign for a Hillary win.

9:37 - the Democratic Party will NOT bow down to a petition from Bernie Bros! Wake up! A lot of Democrats are mad at Bernie for only joining the party when it was advantageous to him. He's an interloper. Why the hell didn't he join us 10 or 20 years ago? No petition will matter. But fairy tales are comforting, at bedtime.

I am happy about your enthusiasm; voting is crucial for a democracy. However: it would be a terrible mistake for liberals to fight among themselves over their two candidates; all it does is make it easier for the right wing to divide and conquer. I am looking forward to less animosity between Hillary's camp and Bernie's camp: we are more alike than different, and a united front is much harder to beat.

When I point out Hillary has the delegates, it's a fact that matters. If Sanders supporters can't understand the process, they might want to look it up, rather than heap criticism on Hillary for winning.

Well, the fix is in since so many superdelegates declared for Hillary before Iowa or New Hampshire or before Bernie showed what kind of support he could get.

What happens if the popular vote goes to Sanders but Hillary still has more delegates. Will the party negate the will of the people? If so, that makes them no better than the Republicans and their "brokered" convention.

It will also show that this country is no longer any kind of democracy but is sham run by a few chosen elite. Then our government will not be representative of the people as we will be forced to choose between two candidates that the elite has already chosen for us to vote for.

(and also YES to a GOP presidency, Congress, and Supreme Court; and NO to gay marriage and reproductive rights, because fuck our kids and grandkids, let them start their OWN revolution. No more compromise!!).

57 year old woman Bernin' up for a better future for our country. Sanders is a wise man with integrity. He will choose a running mate that complements his philosophy and balances out his weaknesses. I also think we need to keep Warren in the Senate. Bernie is in good health and pretty athletic still from his high school track star days. I believe he could do well for two terms; however the skeptics might feel better if he choose a younger VP just in case.

If you have any doubts how he will do against the Republicans, check out these surveys. He has a strong following among the young and independents. People who do their own research, not just listen to the media brainwashing.

We need luxury cars to go back to $3,000 and if the car manufacturers balk on hirer wages and cheaper cars and they organize to take their factories to other countries, President Sanders will force car mfrs to stay put in the USA.

Don't think that free college won't come with heavy stipulations such as maintaining a B+ grade average in order to qualify for your college stipend. I don't think Bernie just wants to have every Tom, Dick and Harriet enrolled in college for free just because, I believe he wants to pay for college for those that will earn the benefit.

HRH Hillary will have us in another foreign disaster before the confetti is swept up after the Inaugural Ball. I certainly want a Democrat to win the upcoming election, but I seriously doubt my ability to vote for Billary again.

I couldn't tell where those numbers in the chart came from. If from New Hampshire, it's not reflective of Democrats. New Hampshire had an open primary and Bernie's win was credited to independent, not Democratic, voters.

Sanders is running a populist campaign, stirring up anger at a common enemy, Wall Street-the 1%-millionaires-billionaires. (Consider the voters interviewed prior to New Hampshire's open primary who were trying to decide between Trump and Sanders.) His formula won't create an effective or long-lasting revolution.

I'd be interested to see Sanders' revolution compared to Ron Paul's revolution...or to Tom Hayden or Ralph Nader.

Who is more likely to sway independent, undeclared and non-partisan voters. Because that is who is going to win.

If Bernie gets the Democrats plus the Independents, et all, he wins.

If it's between Hillary and Trump, who will get the Independents. Because Republicans will vote for Trump (Or Rubio or Cruz or whoever) no matter what. Democrats will vote for Hillary. Whoever sways the middle will win. I'm not sure Hillary could get them to vote for her.

As we saw w/Obama-yeah, the ideals are great, but the ability to move them through congress is a far different task. Youth don't see this as they are, well, youth.

He's got good ideas and some history in the greater field, sure. I'm just not feeling the Bern has a proven history of success in that type of setting or on the world stage like Hillary's wife of president, senator and secretary of state experiences show.

I just don't see the interest in Bernie Sanders. Especially as POTUS. He'll increase taxes horribly if everything were done that he seems to want accomplished as POTUS.

Plus, he thinks Congress (if Republican majority) would work with him. He'd be very much disappointed. Hillary Clinton will have a tough time with them too, but she has bigger balls, experience and knowledge than the majority of Republicans that are currently 'the do nothings' and 'haters' of our society!

I just don't think he'll get the nomination. I think Hillary Clinton well. Don't forget the Delegate numbers!

Next question - do folks think Elizabeth Warren would run w/Hillary? Vice President slot? I would love seeing the two of them elected. What an amazing duo they'd make. I'd vote for their ticket in a split second!

If the strong youth interest in liberal policy and candidates is supported by them actually getting to the polls for midterm elections then they will have the government they crave, if not, then it's business as usual.

Let's just hope that their excitement in ideology translates to an excitement to get out the vote.

Im on board with you, Gryphen. Change takes baby steps, just look how hard our current president's worked and what he's accomplished, against all odds. Just imagine how much more if he had some help from across the aisle. I was amazed at our youth when I worked with OFA, he ran a remarkable election like a well oiled machine and got people excited. I was on the fence, but I'll be damned if we hand anything over to the GOP, especially the presiency. I'm for Hillary, but will vote for whomever the candidate happens to be on the Democratic Ticket, anything's better than watching idiots undo the progress and send our country down the drain.

No! Not with the "incrementalism" again!*****************************************

It's taken forty years of Movement Conservative and Neo-Liberal presidents to get America to where we're at right now. I'm not prepared to wait forty more to right the ship. If FDR took an incrementalist approach the Great Depression would have lasted until 1970. Blow. It. Up.

Just saw Michael Moore's newest movie Where to Invade next. This movie is exactly what we need right now to show that Bernie isn't selling pie in the sky, and why are we settling for less than what we need/deserve? We don't know how the rest of the world is living, and we are convinced that we are #1 while we accept low wages, no sick leave, food stamps, prison sentences to take out generations of people to do slave labor.

This isn't just a great documentary, it's a great film, with jaw dropping reveals and unexpected twists. By about 5 minutes into the film I was hooked and at the edge of my seat as the rest of the two hours flew by; I didn't want it to end, which is always a good sign.

To be clear, this film is not about U.S. military interventions like Fahrenheit 9/11, as I suspected, but rather an ironic look into the discordance between American values and American actions; not abroad but at home. It takes us outside our world only to look back at ourselves as if we were strangers. We get to see our values around health, education, incarceration, violence, and fairness in a new light. And, without giving too much away, the film culminates with a big twist that is marvelously compelling.

As a result, this film has stuck with me. It has been months since I first saw the film at the Chicago International Film Festival, where it won the Founder's Award, and I find myself thinking about the film at least weekly, which finally prompted me to write this short review.

I'm telling everyone I meet to see this film, and to bring their friends, kids, neighbors. Plan some time to talk afterward! I can't wait to see it again myself.

Democrats turn out for presidential elections and then ignore mid-terms, governorships, local assemblies, school boards, etc. For republicans, the lowest, most insignificant elected or appointed position is important because it's in those small out of the way places their philosophy can be planted and take root. A lot of damage can be done in those 'tiny' elections. The gradual takeover of American politics has been in the works for decades. Democrats get fired up every four years. Neither Clinton nor Sanders are the answer in themselves. Neither will save us from ourselves. Republicans have been so deft at defining liberals, I think most liberals believe them, which is why they defer to progressive or moderate or whatever. We still cling to the misguided belief that reason and goodness will win the day, that republicans will do the right thing when confronted with the truth. They won't. They never do. They'd rather lie and watch you suffer than speak ill of their party and their backers. The revolution Sanders speaks of is one of beginning to restore faith and trust in the system. It's not about free stuff. It's about fairness. It's easy to get caught in the propaganda of both sides. For example, why do I continue to think Sanders is not electable? Because I have been indoctrinated by a media that tells me that. Is Clinton's experience the be all and end all? Maybe, but Obama has been a pretty decent president without comparable experience. Time for democrats to get a game plan and to review all of their assumptions.

About Me

This blog is dedicated to finding the truth, exposing the lies, and holding our politicians and leaders accountable when they fall far short of the promises that they have made to both my fellow Alaskans and the American people.